Already contacted Davide. Impatiently waiting for a response.I agree with Nimrod: let's get the files -the cost is is nil- and I said that before:Davide won't get rich from it but Freeciv.org will.Monami's comment is not only truthful (he -Davide- did a good job and everybody was happy with him.) But it adds to the mystery.BUT, Let's play down Davide's attitude. Let us get those files!!

Hi the Grime,this is great news! My hero!I'd only just started my first GT game. It was very disillusioning. I even started playing Civ V again.I'm looking forward to seeing what you can do."You don't know what you've got til it's gone" (Are they the right words?)Hopefully people can help you. And even make it so that this doesn't have to happen again.Can you enlighten us as to what happened? Davide seemed enthusiastic up until the end announcing GT12.But I don't really need to know, just curious.Anyway, thanks again

Status Update: The domain names are now registered with me. The files will be on their way over soon. As for hosting, I'm still debating the best way forward. I'm considering a dedicated server at a hosting provider. The upside is that the site and the game servers would have their own machine. This should be capable of running more than four GT games at once. The downside is the price -- 20 euros a month. Short term I'm ok with paying that, but I'd like a means of covering the cost in the long term.

Thus, my proposal is the following: a tiered membership system of some sort. My initial idea would be to allow one GT at a time free, but require a "membership fee" of 1 euro a month to play simultaneous GT games. My feeling is that would allow the community to grow, permit some sort of sustainability for GT, and maybe even cut down on idlers a bit (why pay if you're not going to play?). I don't intend to get rich, nor fleece users. My main concern is to cover the cost of hosting. Any "profits" generated would be either reinvested in the site or donated to the Freeciv project.

There are all sorts of potential pitfalls with this approach. I imagine some in the community would be morally opposed for some reason or another. Some may just not have the money. Some may decide to play elsewhere free. So I'm open to suggestions, ideas, or complaints.

To the Grime,NGOs often report that people are much more likely to take responsibilty for something if they have paid some money for it. It means they have invested in it so they feel some degree of ownership. For example: maintaining a new water well, pump or toilet; Holding onto livestock if they've paid even a small amount for them rather than selling them off.On the other hand, like you said, some people might not be able to pay. I think you're suggestion is a good balance, especially as it also doesn't make people pay to try it out for the first time.Many of those who could pay would certainly give more than the requested amount anyway, myself included, so it would more than make up for the others.I think it's a good model. Looks like Greatturn is in safe hands.Evan

Solutions1. Fixed donation system e.g. 1euros per game. Players are asked to donate or explain why they can't or don't want to pay. 2. Income region variable fee. Depending on the region you are from you may be asked more or less money. E.g. Europe or America would be asked to pay 3 euros per game while poor countries les s than 1 $In any case I would tie cost to matches. Not to months.